149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33038095)
21. MRI for the assessment of malignancy in BI-RADS 4 mammographic microcalcifications.
Bennani-Baiti B; Dietzel M; Baltzer PA
PLoS One; 2017; 12(11):e0188679. PubMed ID: 29190656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. A deep learning framework to classify breast density with noisy labels regularization.
Lopez-Almazan H; Javier Pérez-Benito F; Larroza A; Perez-Cortes JC; Pollan M; Perez-Gomez B; Salas Trejo D; Casals M; Llobet R
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2022 Jun; 221():106885. PubMed ID: 35594581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. [Stereotactic Mammotome breast biopsy: routine clinical experience and correlation with BI-RADS--classification and histopathology].
Michel SC; Löw R; Singer G; Otto R; Hohl M; Kubik RA
Praxis (Bern 1994); 2007 Sep; 96(39):1459-74. PubMed ID: 17966279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsies in 500 women with microcalcifications: radiological and pathological correlations.
Kettritz U; Morack G; Decker T
Eur J Radiol; 2005 Aug; 55(2):270-6. PubMed ID: 16036159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. MR Imaging for Diagnosis of Malignancy in Mammographic Microcalcifications: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Bennani-Baiti B; Baltzer PA
Radiology; 2017 Jun; 283(3):692-701. PubMed ID: 27788035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Bayesian network to predict breast cancer risk of mammographic microcalcifications and reduce number of benign biopsy results: initial experience.
Burnside ES; Rubin DL; Fine JP; Shachter RD; Sisney GA; Leung WK
Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):666-73. PubMed ID: 16926323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Automatic Calcification Morphology and Distribution Classification for Breast Mammograms With Multi-Task Graph Convolutional Neural Network.
Du H; Yao MM; Liu S; Chen L; Chan WP; Feng M
IEEE J Biomed Health Inform; 2023 Aug; 27(8):3782-3793. PubMed ID: 37027577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The positive predictive value of BI-RADS microcalcification descriptors and final assessment categories.
Bent CK; Bassett LW; D'Orsi CJ; Sayre JW
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 May; 194(5):1378-83. PubMed ID: 20410428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Computer-aided classification of BI-RADS category 3 breast lesions.
Buchbinder SS; Leichter IS; Lederman RB; Novak B; Bamberger PN; Sklair-Levy M; Yarmish G; Fields SI
Radiology; 2004 Mar; 230(3):820-3. PubMed ID: 14739315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Performance of 2D Synthetic Mammography Versus Digital Mammography in the Detection of Microcalcifications at Screening.
Dodelzon K; Simon K; Dou E; Levy AD; Michaels AY; Askin G; Katzen JT
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2020 Jun; 214(6):1436-1444. PubMed ID: 32255687
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. A computer-aided diagnosis system for breast ultrasound based on weighted BI-RADS classes.
Rodríguez-Cristerna A; Gómez-Flores W; de Albuquerque Pereira WC
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2018 Jan; 153():33-40. PubMed ID: 29157459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. A deep learning method for classifying mammographic breast density categories.
Mohamed AA; Berg WA; Peng H; Luo Y; Jankowitz RC; Wu S
Med Phys; 2018 Jan; 45(1):314-321. PubMed ID: 29159811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Comparison of diagnostic performances in the evaluation of breast microcalcifications: synthetic mammography versus full-field digital mammography.
Kilic P; Sendur HN; Gultekin S; Gultekin II; Cindil E; Cerit M
Ir J Med Sci; 2022 Aug; 191(4):1891-1897. PubMed ID: 34472041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Evaluation of the role of dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for patients with BI-RADS 3-4 microcalcifications.
Jiang Y; Lou J; Wang S; Zhao Y; Wang C; Wang D
PLoS One; 2014; 9(6):e99669. PubMed ID: 24927476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Breast microcalcifications: the UK RCR 5-point breast imaging system or BI-RADS; which is the better predictor of malignancy?
Metaxa L; Healy NA; O'Keeffe SA
Br J Radiol; 2019 Nov; 92(1103):20190177. PubMed ID: 31365279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. [Ultrasound examination of breast microcalcifications: luxury or necessity?].
Balu-Maestro C; Chapellier C; Ben Taaritt I; Fournol M
J Radiol; 2006 Dec; 87(12 Pt 1):1849-58. PubMed ID: 17213769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Deep learning performance for detection and classification of microcalcifications on mammography.
Pesapane F; Trentin C; Ferrari F; Signorelli G; Tantrige P; Montesano M; Cicala C; Virgoli R; D'Acquisto S; Nicosia L; Origgi D; Cassano E
Eur Radiol Exp; 2023 Nov; 7(1):69. PubMed ID: 37934382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Comparison of synthetic and digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis or alone for the detection and classification of microcalcifications.
Choi JS; Han BK; Ko EY; Kim GR; Ko ES; Park KW
Eur Radiol; 2019 Jan; 29(1):319-329. PubMed ID: 29931560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. A High-Performance Deep Neural Network Model for BI-RADS Classification of Screening Mammography.
Tsai KJ; Chou MC; Li HM; Liu ST; Hsu JH; Yeh WC; Hung CM; Yeh CY; Hwang SH
Sensors (Basel); 2022 Feb; 22(3):. PubMed ID: 35161903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Mammographic features and correlation with biopsy findings using 11-gauge stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (SVABB).
Mendez A; Cabanillas F; Echenique M; Malekshamran K; Perez I; Ramos E
Ann Oncol; 2004 Mar; 15(3):450-4. PubMed ID: 14998847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
